On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 09:23:18AM -0500, John Madden wrote:
> FWIW, I won't run anything on hardware anymore unless I absolutely have
> to. To me, the benefits of running virtualized outweigh the pitfalls --
> dealing with real OS installs on real hardware, dealing with
> multipathing and SAN
John Madden schrieb:
> FWIW, I won't run anything on hardware anymore unless I absolutely have
> to. To me, the benefits of running virtualized outweigh the pitfalls --
> dealing with real OS installs on real hardware, dealing with
> multipathing and SAN (virtual disks are easy), etc.
Our Cyru
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 03:35:53PM +0100, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> --On 9. November 2009 07:51:34 -0600 Kenneth Marshall wrote:
>
>> I will go ahead and chime in here. If and only if your I/O usage is
>> well understood and managed, would a VM option work. As others have
>> mentioned, any amoun
--On 9. November 2009 07:51:34 -0600 Kenneth Marshall wrote:
I will go ahead and chime in here. If and only if your I/O usage is
well understood and managed, would a VM option work. As others have
mentioned, any amount of heavy I/O will take out or slow dramatically
every VM that needs any I/O
>> The main advantage that ESX would offer is in employing VMotion,
>> VMMware HA and such. It adds a layer of complexity, but also a layer
>> of security and convenience.
We're about to virtualize our environment, albeit on Xen rather than
ESX. (It's been my experience that Xen performs bette
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 02:35:53PM +0100, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> --On 9. November 2009 14:10:54 +0100 Simon Matter
> wrote:
>
>> While virtualization has advantages it has also disadvantages. One thing
>> is that it introduces an additional layer of complexity into the game.
>> It's my impre
Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> --On 9. November 2009 14:10:54 +0100 Simon Matter
> wrote:
>
>> While virtualization has advantages it has also disadvantages. One thing
>> is that it introduces an additional layer of complexity into the game.
>> It's my impression that in many areas virtualization
--On 9. November 2009 14:10:54 +0100 Simon Matter
wrote:
While virtualization has advantages it has also disadvantages. One thing
is that it introduces an additional layer of complexity into the game.
It's my impression that in many areas virtualization gets introduced not
because of technical
> Thanks for your reply!
>
> --On 9. November 2009 07:24:22 -0500 Adam Tauno Williams
> wrote:
>
>> We run a ~500-600 connection Cyrus in ESX. But that isn't ~2,500.
>> There are so many variables here.
>
> True ...
>
>> How much I/O your hypervisor can absorb depends on the same thing as a
>> me
Thanks for your reply!
--On 9. November 2009 07:24:22 -0500 Adam Tauno Williams
wrote:
We run a ~500-600 connection Cyrus in ESX. But that isn't ~2,500.
There are so many variables here.
True ...
How much I/O your hypervisor can absorb depends on the same thing as a
metal system - the u
On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 08:55 -0300, Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn
> wrote:
> > --On 9. November 2009 08:37:46 -0300 Reinaldo de Carvalho
> > wrote:
> >> You need analyse the I/O consumition.
> >> # iostat -d 1
> > I trust real world experiences mo
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn
wrote:
> --On 9. November 2009 08:37:46 -0300 Reinaldo de Carvalho
> wrote:
>
>> You need analyse the I/O consumition.
>>
>> # iostat -d 1
>
> I trust real world experiences more than benchmarks ... either people on
> this list have successfully
--On 9. November 2009 08:37:46 -0300 Reinaldo de Carvalho
wrote:
You need analyse the I/O consumition.
# iostat -d 1
I trust real world experiences more than benchmarks ... either people on
this list have successfully run Cyrus under ESX or they haven't. I don't
want to be the first to tr
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 8:23 AM, Sebastian Hagedorn
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> today I've learned that the Dell hardware our mail servers run on is out of
> support, because it's more than 5 years old (time flies ...). We were
> planning an upgrade from RHEL 3 to RHEL 5 anyway, but now we will try to
> accel
Hi,
today I've learned that the Dell hardware our mail servers run on is out of
support, because it's more than 5 years old (time flies ...). We were
planning an upgrade from RHEL 3 to RHEL 5 anyway, but now we will try to
accelerate that procedure somewhat. Our systems group is pushing VMware
15 matches
Mail list logo